pwoods1

It has been several years' since I wrote my previous review: ill-health affects us all at some time in our lives and I am thankful just to be here. "Micmacs" or, more properly, "Micmacs à tire-larigot" is where I choose to start writing reviews again. Yes, I think it is THAT good.

Jeunet uses a Daliesque palette in both the cinematography and mise-en-scène which seem his forte. Whilst Amélie appealed to mainstream audiences, this wonderfully black comedy seems destined to become more of a cult classic - not because it is inferior in any way, but because its subject (and witty yet pointed screenplay) mean that thinking as an adjunct to enjoyment is most necessary.

The plight of the homeless and disenfranchised has been explored by many directors before, but not, perhaps, with such a literate and poetic touch. The sense of community and the need for each member of the 'micmacs' to participate in the action against the arms dealers is central to their sense of worth (or lack of it). We are teased with glimpses/fragments of each character's previous life and what has brought them, literally, to the scrap-heap.

There is a lot of Tati in Dany Boon's performance as the central protagonist, and Julie Ferrier's turn as a contortionist is brilliant comedy. The selection of this relatively-large ensemble cast is inspired. Even Beckett seems to haunt the wings.

So there it is. A review with no spoilers and hints at elements of Surrealism and The Theatre of the Absurd. PLEASE, see this film. It has a lot to say about the human condition.

I haven't laughed so much in years!

There is just so much fun to be had that more than one viewing is required - every scene has some Aardman magic: some of it so fast that it's easy to miss a delightful nuance...

The 'choice of voice', from Jean Reno to Bill Nighy to Miriam Margolyes to EVERYONE is inspired.

The detailed backgrounds are 'to die for'. And the story/plot line ably supports deranged villains, Heath Robinson-esquire contraptions and a suitably fraught romance. I can't discuss things in any more detail since almost ANY in-depth remarks would inadvertently supply spoilers.

I'm about to rush out and buy the DVD - yes, it's THAT good!

One of the advantages of being an audience member (at least in the West) is that one can say what one likes re politics and/or regimes and not be imprisoned. Interested? Then read on...

Can we perceive this monster as the threat from NORTH Korea? It's not such an outrageous idea: it is hinted at the start of the film that the US military is responsible for the creation of the monster - insert the notion of the fallout from the Korean 'police-action' and the creation of the Communist state north of the 38th parallel.

The monster crosses the river-as-border (mostly) by bridge: how often have we seen the cold war 'exchanges' beloved of '50s/'60s film makers take place on those very constructions? Even the featured family (supposedly dysfunctional under-achievers) might possibly represent the notion of American 'paternalism' in South Korea: i.e. Koreans cannot be left unsupervised or trusted to make their own way in the world... add to this another US military doctor who looks suspiciously like Elmo Lincoln (the '20s screen's cross-eyed Tarzan) and the plot becomes as murky as the river.

Still, I could have imagined the whole scenario. Although, come to think of it, aren't ALL movies smoke-and-mirrors and paranoia; or is it just me? Apart from anything else, this is a FUN movie for all the family or at least that's what it seems on the surface!